Cityview Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
5801 Bryant Irvin Rd, Fort Worth, TX 76132 · Non profit - Corporation · 210 certified beds · (817) 346-3030 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2025
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- inspectors cited 4 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $234,014 in federal fines (most recent 2025-07-10)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 4 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 15.0% | 15.8% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.8% | 3.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.3% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.2% | 2.4% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.9% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.7% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.4% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.3% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 14.0% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.4% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.4% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.8% | 25.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.2% | 12.3% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.16 | 2.17 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.75 | 2.06 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
55.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 141 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 48.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 88 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 55.6%CMS range 44.0–63.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.7%CMS range 8.6–15.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 48.9% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 48.9% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 42.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 96.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.8% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.2%CMS range 4.1–10.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.94 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 210 beds and averages 184.4 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 26 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.34 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.86 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.01 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
41 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2025-07-10 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents had the right to be free of abuse for 3 of 5 residents (Residents #6, #7 and #8) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure Residents #7 and #8 had the right to be free from abuse when Resident #6 hit Resident #7 in the face on 06/26/25 and put his hands around Resident #8's neck on 07/02/25. An IJ was identified on 07/10/25. The IJ began on 06/26/25 and was removed on 07/06/25. The facility took action to remove the IJ before the abbreviated survey began. While the IJ was removed on 07/06/25, the facility remained out of compliance with a scope of pattern and severity level of no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm . The failure placed residents at risk for abuse. Findings included:Record review of Resident #6's admission MDS, dated [DATE] and signed as complete by the DON on 06/25/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male. The resident admitted from home to the facility on [DATE],…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2025-01-31 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 3 of 6 (Resident #3, #4, and #5) residents reviewed for use of assistance devices for positioning and transfers. 1. On 01/13/25 Hospice Aide K failed to use a drawsheet when repositioning Resident #3 in bed and instead raised her up underneath her armpits hard to pull her up in bed and heard a loud crack or pop. The facility ordered x-rays, and it was determined the resident had sustained a displaced humeral neck fracture (shoulder/upper arm fracture) due to the improper transfer and failure to use a drawsheet to position her in bed. 2. The facility failed to ensure Hospice LVN BB and Hospice Aide CC used a transfer belt when transferring Resident #4 and Resident #5. An IJ was identified on 01/29/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 4:03 PM. While the IJ was removed on 01/31/25, the facility remained out of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2024-09-17 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — patternProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and records review, the facility failed to ensure that pain management was provided to residents who required such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pain management. The facility failed to obtain physician orders for the intrathecal pain pump from the Pain Physician for Resident #1 upon admission on [DATE] for immediate care and needs. After the orders were obtained, the facility failed to assist Resident #1 with a patient controlled bolus as needed for breakthrough pain via a surgically implanted pain pump per the Pain Medicine Physician Orders dated 09/10/24 at 2:25 PM. The facility failed to assist Resident #1 with a patient controlled bolus (a single dose of a drug or other medicinal preparation given all at once) of a combination pain medication infusion (Baclofen 15.0 mcg [skeletal muscle relaxant]; Hydromorphone…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2024-09-17 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and records review, the facility failed to ensure that licensed nurses have the knowledge, competencies and skill sets to provide care and respond to each resident's individualized needs as identified in his/her assessment and care plan for one (Resident #1) of one resident reviewed for nursing care/services, in that: Prior to admission, the facility failed to determine the knowledge, competencies, or skill sets of nursing staff to meet the needs of Resident #1 with an intrathecal pain pump (a surgically implanted device that delivers medication directly to the fluid surrounding the spinal cord). The facility failed to educate, train, and assess nursing staff performance for the effective application of knowledge and skill provide competencies and skills sets necessary to provide care to Resident #1 who is a quadriplegic with chronic pain, a surgically implanted pain pump, and the risk of Autonomic Dysreflexia a life-threatening condition that can occur in people who have had a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-29 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with a clean and comfortable environment by providing clean bed linens that are in good condition for 1 of 7 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for safe environment.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1' s bedding was changed when it was saturated in urine. This failure could place the resident at risk of skin breakdown and decreased feelings of self-worth. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS assessment, dated 12/05/25, indicated Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cancer of the intestines that had spread throughout the body, mass on the left kidney requiring the placement of a drainage tube, and acute kidney failure. His BIMS score was 14, indicating his cognition was intact. His Functional Ability assessment indicated he was dependent on staff for his toileting hygiene. His Bowel and Bladder assessment indicated he was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who needs respiratory care, is provided with such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals and preferences for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #19 and #37) reviewed for non-invasive ventilation care.1. The facility failed to ensure there were physician orders for the use of Resident #19's BiPAP machine, which is a non-invasive ventilation machine that is capable of generating two adjustable pressure levels.2 The facility failed to ensure there were physician orders for the use of Resident #37's CPAP machine, which is a non-invasive ventilation machine that involves the administration of air usually through the nose by an external device at a predetermined level of pressure.These failures placed residents at risk of not receiving adequate and necessary respiratory care.Record review of Resident #19's admission MDS, dated [DATE], reflected the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolatedAllow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide residents and responsible parties the right to participate in the development and implementation of their person-centered plan of care for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #14) reviewed for quarterly care plans.The facility failed to provide Resident #14 and responsible parties with 4 quarterly care plan conference meetings for the last 12 months. Resident #14's last care plan meeting was dated 08/02/24.This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving inadequate interventions individualized to their care needs.Findings included:Record review of Resident #14's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 05/10/25, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The assessment reflected the resident's cognition was not documented. The resident had diagnoses which included stroke (medical emergency where blood flow to the brain is interrupted, leading to brain cell death from lack of oxygen and nutrients).…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 resident of 9 residents (Resident #74) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop a care plan addressing Resident #74's preference to provide self-care for his colostomy (an opening in the colon that lets stool pass from the body without going through the anus).The failure placed residents at risk of not having their care preferences care planned which could result in decreased quality of life. Findings included:Record review of Resident #74's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/18/25, reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including colostomy status (an opening (stoma) in the colon (large…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #14) for care plan revisions. The facility failed to review and revise Resident #14's comprehensive care plan after the MDS assessment was completed on 05/10/25. Resident #14's last care plan meeting was dated 08/02/24.This failure placed residents at risk of not having their individual needs met. Findings included:Record review of Resident #14's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 05/10/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmission on [DATE]. The assessment reflected the resident cognition was not documented. The resident had diagnoses which included stroke (medical emergency where blood flow to the brain is interrupted, leading to brain cell death from lack of oxygen and nutrients). Record review of Resident #14's care plan, 5/12/25 reflected…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received proper treatment and care to maintain good foot health by providing foot care and treatment, in accordance with professional standards of practice, including to prevent complications from the resident's medical condition for 1 of 18 residents (Resident #74) reviewed for foot care.The facility failed to ensure Resident #74's toenails were clipped. This failure could result in residents developing fungal infections or other podiatric problems. Findings included:Record review of Resident #74's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/18/25, reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including colostomy status (an opening (stoma) in the colon (large intestine) to divert stool outside the body), vascular parkinsonism (blood vessel problems in the brain, such as small strokes, that damage the areas controlling movement), hypertension (high blood pressure),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #14) reviewed for pharmacy procedures.1. ADON B failed to follow the facility policy of flushing Resident #14's gastrostomy tube with 5-10 mL (or prescribed amount) of water between medications, when she administered medication through gastronomy tube (feeding tube). 2. ADON B failed to check for residual through aspiration before administering medication to Resident #14. These failures could place residents at risk of physical and chemical incompatibilities leading to an altered therapeutic response and put residents who received medications via gastrostomy tube at risk for gastronomy tube blockage and medication interaction. Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #14's quarterly MDS assessment, dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-10 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the resident or other residents for 5 residents (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) of 20 residents reviewed for accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure call lights were placed within reach of Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5. This failures could place residents at risk of harm or inability to call for help.Observations on 7/10/25 from 11:03 AM-11:54 AM of the 300 and 400 Halls revealed call light cords were not within reach of Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5. Resident #1's cord was stored in her bedside dresser. Resident #2's cord was under her mattress. Residents #3, #4, and #5's cords were hanging from the light above the head of the bed. All of the residents were in their beds, and their call lights were not within their reach. Follow up observations on 07/10/25 from 1:06 PM-1:24 PM of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 2 of 5 resident (Residents #1 and #2) reviewed for supervision. The facility failed to provide adequate supervision to Residents #1 and #2, who both had severe cognitive impairment and resided on the facility's memory care unit. On 02/02/25, Resident #1 was found fully clothed in Resident #2's bed, and Resident #2 had no clothing on below the waist. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The noncompliance began on 02/02/25 and ended on 02/03/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. The failure could place residents at risk for abuse. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 06/17/25, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 06/11/25, reflected her diagnoses included Alzheimer's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-31 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to be free from abuse for 1 of 10 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 was free from abuse when Resident #1 hit Resident #2 on both arms, causing a 9.0 cm x 6.0 cm bruise to the right forearm and a 11.0 cm x 7.0 cm bruise to the left forearm and a skin tear on the resident's middle finger, on 08/03/24 with a closed fist during a verbal altercation on the secured unit. The noncompliance was identified as past noncompliance (PNC). The noncompliance began on 08/03/24 and ended on 08/03/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the investigation began. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse and psychological harm. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 05/15/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses of dementia (disease that results in loss of memory, language…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 27 citations
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to ensure food items were kept away from potential airborne contaminants (dust and fuzz) on the ceiling vents. This failure could place residents at risk for food contamination and food-borne illness. Findings included: Observation on 07/23/24 at 8:55 AM revealed a total of ten air conditioning vents in the kitchen area were observed to have built-up fuzz and dust stuck to them. Interview on 07/24/24 at 11:55 AM with Dietary Aide revealed all kitchen staff were responsible for cleaning kitchen equipment. She stated all kitchen staff had daily assignments. Dietary Aide stated maintenance staff were responsible for cleaning the air vents. She stated she could not recall when was the last time air vents were cleaned. She stated the air vents needed to be clean because of all the build-up. She stated kitchen staff would report to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-25 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a private meeting space for the residents' monthly group meetings for 10 of 10 confidential residents reviewed for resident council. The facility failed to provide a private space for resident group meetings. This failure could place residents, who attended resident group meetings, at risk of not being able to voice concerns due to a lack of privacy. Findings included: Interview on 07/23/24 at 9:21 AM with the Activity Director revealed the resident group meetings were being held up stairs in the open middle area. Activity Director stated the only other space would be the conference room which was where the survey team was working. Observation and interview on 07/24/24 beginning at 10:30 AM, during a confidential resident group meeting with 10 residents, revealed the meeting was held in the activity/dining room. There were doors that closed off the space from one hall to another hall; however, in between the hall there was several offices to include the DON's office, the Social Worker's office, the HR…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-25 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene for 4 of 6 residents (Residents #334, #386, #88 and #109) reviewed for ADLs. 1.The facility failed to ensure Resident #334 received showers as scheduled. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #386 received showers as scheduled. 3. The facility failed to provide Resident #88 assistance with daily oral care. 4. The facility failed to provide Resident #109 assistance with daily oral care. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, decreased quality of life, and decreased self-esteem. The findings include: 1.Review of Resident #334's face sheet, dated 07/25/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #334's admission MDS Assessment, dated 07/19/24, reflected a BIMS score of 14,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-25 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that respiratory care was provided consistent with professional standards of practice for 2 (Resident #32 and Resident #88) of 6 residents reviewed for respiratory care, in that: The facility failed to obtain physician orders for Resident #32 and Resident #88 to receive oxygen. The facility failed to replace Resident #32's oxygen humidifier bottle when empty. The facility failed to replace Resident #88's nasal cannula when it was discolored and it was not dated. This deficient practice could affect resident who received oxygen therapy continuously placed him at-risk for respiratory infection, and ineffective treatment. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #32's Face sheet, dated 07/25/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #32's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 05/02/24, reflected her had a BIMS score of 02 which…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-25 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, for 4 (Resident #30, #75, #127 and #136) of 6 residents reviewed for dialysis. 1.The facility failed to maintain dialysis communication sheets for Residents #30, #75, #88, #127, and #136. This failure could place residents at risk of inadequate post dialysis care. Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #30's undated admission Record reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included kidney failure requiring dialysis, dementia, and diabetes. Record review of Resident #30's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected a BIMS score of 9, indicating she was mildly cognitively impaired. Her Special Treatments indicated she required dialysis. Record review of Resident #30's care plan, date 5/17/24, reflected she received hemodialysis every Monday, Wednesday,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 2 (Residents #35 and #246) of 6 residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services. 1.LVN F failed to follow physician orders for administering Exelon transdermal patch to Residents #35. 2.LVN K failed to follow the physician orders for administering medication to Resident # 246s, when he administered Nafcillin Sodium Injection Solution (Nafcillin Sodium) (antibiotic) 12g/1000mls intravenous to Resident #246. These failures could put residents at risk of not receiving their medications as ordered. Findings included: Review of Resident #35 's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/15/24, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Parkinson's(is a progressive disorder that affects the nervous system and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-25 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure it was free of a medication error rate of five percent (5%) or greater on 2 errors of 27 opportunities for errors leading to 7.41% medication error rates for two (LVN F and LVN K) of four staff observed for medication pass. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN F administered medications as ordered to Resident #35 by administering Exelon patch (a treatment for Parkinson and dementia) without removing the old patch on 7/23/24. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN K properly administered medications as ordered to Resident #246 when administering Nafcillin 12gm/1000mls every 24 hours, LVN K did not ensure the bag was completely empty (discarded 400mls) before administered a new bag. These failures resulted in a 7.41% medication error rate and could put residents at risk who received medications for not receiving the correct dose of medication and getting intended therapy. Findings include: 1.Review of Resident #35 's quarterly MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-25 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records that were complete and accurate for five (Resident #30, #18, #88, #75, and #127) of six residents reviewed for clinical records. 1. The facility failed to obtain a physician order for Dialysis for Resident #30. 2. The facility failed to obtain a physician order for Dialysis for Resident #18. 3. The facility failed to obtain a complete physician order for Dialysis for Resident #127. 4. The facility failed to obtain a physician order for Dialysis for Resident #88. 5. The facility failed to obtain a physician order for Dialysis for Resident #75. This failure could place residents at risk for incomplete and inaccurately documented medical record that included their progress treatment, services, and interventions. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #30's undated admission Record reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included kidney failure…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 5 (Residents #25, #71, #103 and #244) of 10 residents reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to provide signage and PPE for Resident #71, who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). 2. LVN L failed to don appropriate PPE (gowns) before providing bolus feeding to Resident #103, who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions. 3. LVN K failed to perform hand hygiene, disinfect the blood pressure cuff between residents while monitoring blood pressure to Resident #25,and #244 and while administering medication to Residnet#25. This failure could place residents at risk of contracting an infection from residents on Enhanced Barrier Precautions. and cross contamination, which could result in infections or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-25 · tag F0914 — patternProvide bedrooms that don't allow residents to see each other when privacy is needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to ensure resident rooms were equipped to assure full visual privacy for each resident for 6 (Rooms 321. 322, 323, 324, 325, 327) of 6 rooms reviewed for full visual privacy. The facility failed to ensure privacy curtains in rooms Rooms 321. 322, 323, 324, 325, 327 could provide full visual privacy for both residents. This failure could cause a decrease in feelings of self-worth by being exposed during cares. Findings included: Record review of Resident #71's undated admission Record reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included heart attack, urinary tract infection, heart failure, and high blood pressure. Record review of Resident #71's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 6/28/24, reflected a BIMS score of 8, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. His Functional Status assessment indicated he required partial assistance with all of his ADLs. His Bladder and Bowel Assessment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-25 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility is free of pests and rodents for 4 (Residents # 93, #236, #243, and #435) of 8 residents reviewed for pest control. The facility failed to ensure Residents # 93, #236, #243, and #435 were free from risk of mosquito bites. This failure could place residents at risk of exposure to viruses spread by mosquitos. Findings included: Phone interview/ Observation on 7/22/24 at 12:10 PM Resident #435 stated on 7/7/24 she suffered multiple mosquito bites to her hands, arms, neck and face during the night while sleeping. She notified the staff on the morning of 7/8/24 and they applied ointment to her bites. Observation of photos submitted by Resident #435 to the surveyor which appeared to show 11 bites to her right hand, and two blisters; 8 bites to her right forearm; 15 bites to her left forearm; 2 bites to her right neck; and 6 bites to her right face. Interview and observation on 7/23/24 at 3:00 PM Resident # 236 stated he was bitten several times by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-25 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was informed before, or at the time of admission, and periodically during the residents stay, of services available in the facility and of changes for those services, which included changes for services not covered under Medicare/Medicaid or by the facility's per diem rate for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #89) reviewed for Medicare/Medicaid coverage. The facility failed to ensure Resident #89 was given a SNFABN (SNFABN document that informs a Medicare beneficiary that Medicare will no longer pay for skilled services) when discharged from skilled services at the facility prior to covered days being exhausted. This failure could place residents at risk for not being aware of changes to provided services. Findings included: Record review of Resident #89's face sheet dated 07/25/2024, indicated a [AGE] year-old male, originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included displaced fracture of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-25 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident status for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #9) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. The facility inaccurately coded Resident # 9's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] for dialysis treatment when she was not receiving dialysis treatment. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs. Findings included: Review of Resident #9's face sheet dated [DATE] indicated Resident #9 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #9 had a diagnosis of chronic kidney disease, stage 4 (severe loss of kidney function), and kidney transplant status (surgery to place a healthy kidney from a living or deceased donor into a person whose kidneys no longer function properly). Review of Resident #9's admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident # 9 had a BIMS score of 10 which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS Assessment for Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 (Resident #136 and Resident #103) of 7 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to update Resident #136's care plan to address dialysis. The facility failed to update Resident #103's care plan to address fecal impaction (constipation). This failure could place residents at risk of not having their individual needs met, not receiving necessary care and services, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #136's Face sheet, dated 07/25/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Record review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-25 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections based on the resident's comprehensive assessment for 1 of 3 residents (Residents #71) reviewed for urine incontinence/catheters. The facility failed to ensure Resident #71' catheter urine collection bag was kept off the floor and had a privacy cover. This failure could place residents with catheters at risk for a loss of dignity, decreased self-worth and decreased self-esteem. Findings included: Review of Resident #71's admission Record dated 07/24/24 reflected Resident was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #71's MDS assessment, dated 06/28/24, reflected the resident had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score was 8, and he required partial/moderate assistance with toileting. Resident #71's diagnoses included Urinary Tract Infections, Hypertension (high blood…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-25 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was fed by enteral means received appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications for one (Resident #103) of three residents reviewed for gastrostomy tubes. LVN L failed to flush Resident #103's g-tube with 30ml of water before and after medication administration and provide 100 ml before and after his bolus feeding (feeding method using a syringe to deliver formula through feeding tube) as ordered by the physician. This failure could place residents at risk for a decline in health or adverse effects due to inappropriate management of G-tube care. Findings included: Record review of Resident #103's Face sheet, dated 07/25/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #103's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/15/24, reflected his diagnoses included unspecified sequelae of cerebral infarction (stroke),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-25 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolatedConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to conduct and document a facility wide assessment that addressed the care required by the resident population and the facility's resources for 1 of 1 facility assessment, in that: -The facility assessment inaccurately reflected that there were no dialysis patients in the facility. -The facility assessment did not include contracts, memorandums of understanding, or other agreements with third parties to provide services for dialysis. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk for inadequate care or treatments due to an inaccurate assessment. The findings included: Record Review of Resident #18's face sheet, dated 08/01/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included end stage renal disease, dependance on renal dialysis, and unspecified dementia (memory loss). Record Review of Resident #18's annual MDS Assessment, dated 05/16/24, reflected that the resident had a BIMS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-25 · tag F0840 — isolatedEmploy or obtain outside professional resources to provide services in the nursing home when the facility does not employ a qualified professional to furnish a required service.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure agreements pertaining to services furnished by outside resources specified in writing that the facility assumes responsibility for obtaining services that meet professional standards and principles that apply to professionals providing services in such a facility for 1 of 1 dialysis facilities reviewed for dialysis services. -The facility did not have a written agreement with the dialysis center for Resident #18. This failure could place residents requiring dialysis at risk for failure to receive dialysis services due to lack of coordination of care with a dialysis center and therefore potential physical harm and psychosocial harm. Findings include: Record Review of Resident #18's face sheet, dated 08/01/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included end stage renal disease, dependance on renal dialysis, and unspecified dementia (memory loss). Record Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-25 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to designate a member of the facility's interdisciplinary team to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and others participating in the provision of care for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #109 and #119) reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed: 1. To obtain Resident #119's physician's order for hospice services. 2. To obtain Resident #109's physician's order to discharge from hospice services. This deficient practice could place residents who receive hospice services at-risk of receiving inadequate end-of-life care due to a lack of documentation, coordination of care and communication of resident needs. Findings included: Record Review of Resident #119's face sheet, dated 07/25/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE]…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-06-04 · tag F0563 — failed to protect the right to visitors — patternHonor the resident's right to receive visitors of his or her choosing, at the time of his or her choosing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents have the right to receive visitors of his or her choosing on day and time of his or her choosing for 1 of 2 (Resident #2) residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 had the right to receive visits from Family Member #1 since 11/27/23 inside the facility. This failure placed residents at risk of isolation, decreased emotional wellbeing and diminished quality of life. Findings included: Record review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 06/04/24 revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Type 2 diabetes (a chronic, long-lasting health condition that affects how your body turns food into energy), vascular dementia (decline in cognitive function due to reduced blood flow to the brain) hypertension (high blood pressure), chronic kidney disease and (long standing kidney disease that results in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-04 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent the release of resident-identifiable information to the public, and also failed to maintain medical records that were complete and accurate for 1 Resident #1) of 4 residents reviewed for clinical records. 1. On 11/23/23 LVN A discussed Resident #1's medical conditions with a family member not authorized to receive the information. 2. On 11/23/23 LVN A failed to accurately document Resident #1's disposition after she left AMA, as well as events leading up to Resident #1 leaving AMA. These failures could place residents at risk of incorrect or incomplete documentation of their conditions as well as the release of personal information that could be used for illicit purposes. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's undated admission Record revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of sternum (breast bone) fracture, history of multiple falls, heart attack, heart disease, and diabetes.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible for contaminated sharps disposal bins, attached to 1 (LVN A) of 2 nurse medication carts and 1 of 1 Wound Care Carts, on Station Two Wing, reviewed for hazards in that: LVN A failed to ensure contaminated sharps in the sharps bin attached to the Nurse Medication Cart she was responsible for, on Station Two Wing, were below the full line. LVN B failed to ensure contaminated sharps in the sharps bin attached to the Wound Care Cart, on Station Two Wing, were below the full line. These failures placed residents at risk of being exposed to contaminated sharps and possible blood borne pathogens. Findings included: An observation on 05/10/24 at 12:59 PM revealed the treatment cart parked against the wall, in a common area by Station 2 Nurses Station. The lid on the plastic insert inside the sharps bin attached to the cart was half open. Sharps were filled to the top of the bin approximately two inches past the marked fill line.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to, in accordance with State and Federal laws, ensure all drugs and biological's were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for two of four (Medication Cart #1 and Medication Cart #2) medication carts reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Medication Cart #1 was locked when unattended, and medication cart #2's keys were secured by assigned RN. Both carts contained controlled medication lock box. This failure could place residents at risk of having access to unauthorized medications and/or lead to possible harm or drug diversion. Findings include: In an observation and interview on 02/16/24 at 2:00 PM revealed Medication Cart #1 was in the 200 halls in front of the nursing station facing out ( the back of the med cart was pushed up to the nursing station counter, and unlocked medication storage was facing the walkway where…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-09-15 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — widespreadMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility was free of pests and rodents for the facility's only kitchen. The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to ensure the facility was free from rodents in the kitchen and the kitchen's dry storage room. This failure could place residents at risk for an unsanitary environment and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: A record review of the facility's grievances, dated 09/12/23, reflected: .there were rats in the kitchen. The grievance report reflected the facility's resolution of concern, dated 09/13/23, revealed On 9/13/2023, there was a rodent observed scurrying by the directors office, she immediately notified main department and sticky traps were placed. The rodent was captured and disposed of the next morning. The kitchen was thoroughly cleaned and power washed with no other evidence of pests noted. [Pest Control Company] will increase their monitoring and additional sticky traps were placed with no other captures…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-06-08 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to submit a discharge MDS assessment and transmitting to the CMS System information for each resident contained in the MDS in a format that conforms to standard record layouts and data dictionaries, and that passes standardized edits defined by CMS and the State for four (Residents #2, #18, #129, and #140) of four residents reviewed for timely discharge MDS submission. The facility failed to successfully submit discharge MDS assessments for Residents #2, #18, #129, and #140 when they discharged from the facility. This failure could prevent communication about a resident's status from being transmitted to CMS and could interfere with residents receiving needed services after discharge. Findings: Review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 06/07/23, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old woman, admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses of lupus and dementia. Review of Resident #2's Discharge summary, dated [DATE], reflected she was discharged to her home. Review of a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-06-08 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to prepare puree and regular food by methods that conserve nutritive value, flavor, texture and appearance that is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 8 of 11 residents (Resident #36, #46, #10, #125, #91, #121, #73, and a confidential resident) reviewed for regular diets. The facility failed to ensure that regular diets served were prepared by methods that conserve nutritive value, flavor, texture, and appearance. This could place residents on regular diets at risk for a decrease in quality of life and possible weight loss. Findings included: Interview on 06/06/2023 at 9:56 AM, Resident #10 stated she does not like the type of food they serve. Interview on 06/06/2023 at 10:03 AM, Resident # 125 stated the food is garbage, has minifridge with own food, and sometimes will choose alternative from menu but generally the food served was not his taste. Interview on 06/06/2023 at 10:23 AM, Resident #91 stated he would like to have more variety in his meals. He stated he does not look…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-08 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the resident or other residents for 2 of 11 residents (Resident #121 and Resident #36) reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. 1. The facility staff did not answer Resident #121's call light timely. 2. The facility staff did not place Resident #36's call light within reach. This failure could affect all residents who needed assistance with activities of daily living and could result in needs not being met. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #121's face sheet, dated 06/08/2023, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cervical disc degeneration (neck pain with difficulty moving arms and legs), muscle wasting with atrophy, and type 2 diabetes. Review of Resident #121s Annual MDS,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$234,014 in federal fines across 3 penalties.
- $173,713 — penalty dated 2025-07-10
- $11,853 — penalty dated 2025-01-31
- $48,448 — penalty dated 2024-09-17
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to WELLSENTIAL HEALTH — 67 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 1.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
The other 66 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.7★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 66; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DECATUR HOSPITAL AUTHORITY | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 08/31/2014 |
| BAIRD, DANIEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 04/13/2021 |
| CARVAJAL, ANTONIO | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 05/16/2024 |
| CLAPP, BARBARA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 06/01/2021 |
| CORTESE, DAREN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 08/10/2021 |
| GIBSON, PATRICIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 08/01/2021 |
| GONZALES, VERONICA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 05/16/2024 |
| KAUFMAN, NICOLE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 08/10/2021 |
| MANDELBAUM, ELLIOT | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 09/01/2022 |
| BAKKER, JEFF | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/02/2017 |
| COCANOUGHER, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/24/2010 |
| COOK, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/13/2014 |
| DUNCUM, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/08/2010 |
| FORBIS, CHRISTOPHER | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/03/1994 |
| SANDFORD, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/10/2007 |
| SCROGGINS, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/03/2014 |
| SICKING, JEFFREY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/15/2015 |
| WAGGONER, DEBRA SUE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/10/2007 |
| WILLIAMS, CAREY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/15/2015 |
| ADEDOKUN, ADE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| HANCE, BILLIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| MONTGOMERY, KYNDRA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| NORRIS, JOHN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/18/2024 |
| 5801 BRYANT IRVIN ROAD, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| CSV RHEA MANAGEMENT HOLDCO, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| DWD TX HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| JACK AND NANCY DWYER WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REG HG OPCO 1, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REG HG OPCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REG MASTER TENANT II, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REG OPERATOR HOLDCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY IHS CLINICAL CONSULTING, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY IHS OF CITYVIEW FORT WORTH LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY IHS REHAB LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY TEXAS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| DEKOWSKI, DONOVAN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 42 rows in the source record cover these 37 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
14 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 75% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 675622. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-21, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.